JWilsonphoto
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.2 #15 · The future of pro photography? | |
Lots of great points made in this discussion. Certainly we have witnessed a revolution in our industry over the last five years. Commercially speaking the fact that a person can spend 600 bucks on a digital slr, go out and spin wheels and dials until something 'passable" pops up on the preview screen, has diluted the market. Before the days of zeros and ones, a person who wanted to try to enter the pro arena had to know something about exposure and composition because there was no instant feedback. Joe Blow was reluctant to jump into a commercial assignment with minimal skills because he was going to have some skin in the game in the form of film and processing costs at the very least. He or she wouldn't want to go out and risk several hundred dollars of their own capital unless they had at least a basic skill level that gave them some confidence that they would come up with images the client would actually pay for. Today, all you hear is "I love digital because i can just shoot and delete until I get something I like" Back in the day, the approach was a bit different. You had to know that your skill level was up to the task because you weren't going to see what you were shooting until a few hours to a few days later at your photo lab. Depending upon what format you were shooting you might have a Polaroid to give you some level of comfort, but they were pretty marginal when compared to a digital preview screen. My point here is that digital technology has emboldened thousands, if not tens of thousands of photographers to stick their collective toes in the "pro" market.
You can wax optimistic all you want about professionalism, quality and composition, but the financial impact across the spectrum of people who earn their living as photographers has been substantial. The global financial implosion further complicates that picture by reducing the discretionary income families and companies have for photography. When a family is navigating uncertain financial times, Mom or Dad's digital camera is just fine for special events and holidays. Contrast that with a period of financial plenty where people don't think much of spending 500 to several thousand dollars having family portraits done. Companies have to have photography to promote their products and services, but when their sales are in the tank, Joe in shipping who is a hobbyist and will shoot for nothing or next to it, will generally do just fine as opposed to hiring a talented corporate shooter for several thousand dollars a day plus expenses.
Make no mistake about it, there's a whole new crop of novice photographers who have dreams of going pro, and some of them are pretty darn good, having been sped along the path by digital instant feedback. Since 2008 well over 50% of the photographers in the DFW Metroplex who made their living shooting professionally have just evaporated. This figure takes into account all the major markets from family portraiture to commercial work like architecture and annual reports. Over the last two years I have run into bidding scenarios where photographers who had day rates of three to five thousand are quietly whispering numbers like $1,000 to $1,500.
My work is pretty specialized, and I've been shooting commercially for over thirty years so I'm blessed with a number of advantages over much of my competition. Architecture, especially interior work requires a substantial investment in camera gear and lighting along with a pretty steep learning curve. My corporate work rolls on because I'm able to fly in, scope out a location, set up, have a CEO duck in for three minutes and get what the client wants. They'll still pay pretty good rates for that experience and efficiency. My other major market is aviation, lots of people want to shoot fast cars, cool planes, screaming motorcycles and they'll do it for free, but when a client needs someone to orchestrate an assignment that puts millions of dollars worth of airplanes and a half dozen lives at risk flying in formation, the field narrows to a very few. Basically RD hit the nail on the head. Choose something that few people can do and then get so good at it that the number of people who could come anywhere close to what you do and how you do it is so small it isn't even a factor. Absent the cultivation of a rare niche, there will certainly be people who rise to the top and succeed, but it's a dog eat dog field where the average income ranges from $20,910.00 to $42,300. The good news is that after ten to nineteen years in the profession the average income soars to just over 50 grand. Let's see, 10K for health insurance, couple of grand for liability and camera gear coverage, a vehicle, oh yeah and camera gear, a web presence, marketing materials, peripherals, computers, printers, Wacom Tablets, memory cards, back up hard drives, gas (the kind your vehicle needs and the kind you'll get from your work schedule), gee! the average pro in the US with a decade or more of shooting experience is taking home about 25K after taxes. Even though that probably still makes you "wealthy" in "OBamaworld", the guy behind the counter at the QT is making more per hour than you are in this scenario.
"Just Sayin'"
JW
|
